Originally Posted by TEX:
Donk Double talk. You kind of DID say Denver would be good. You said they won 8 games last year, so this year they should win more. Well if they win more than eight games, that would put them over 500 and that would make them technically a "good" team. They're not and they won't.
I dont blame you for not knowing what a good team looks like.
Fair point. Except I didn’t say that at all. I didn’t once suggest they would win more than eight. I responded to claims they will win 4 or so. [Reply]
Originally Posted by manchambo:
This is ironic considering you people are now saying losing Jeudy is going to make the Denver O significantly worse.
I'm not saying that...but it's whiffs like this and Chubb that got the Doinks where they are.
Could have had CD Lamb and Allen...they were both available and considered by Donk brass. Two blown chances that would have completely altered your teams history. [Reply]
Originally Posted by manchambo:
I think it's a sign that, if nothing else, Paton has brought an honest, pragmatic point of view to the management of this team. He's not going to make decisions on a pipe-dream of getting the wild-card (and, I guess, getting Denver's poop pushed in if they get it) based on the team managing to (barely) beat a terrible team.
Originally Posted by manchambo: I have to say that I'm more comfortable giving up all that capital for Wilson than Rogers. Not because I think Wilson is better, of course, he's certainly not.
But with Rogers the window might be one or two years. Imagine you give up all that trade capital and he gets hurt early in the season. With Wilson, the window is probably 5+ years, so you have time even if he gets injured, time to tweak the roster, etc.
I don't know if teams actually think of it this way, but you could view it as amortization. With Wilson the trade capital is amortized over a longer period.
Bet that bitch goes right back into hibernation now. [Reply]